What is the use of services if you use the ngrx/store and effects?

I'm trying to add NGRX to my Angular project, but I can't tell if I still need services since components can dispatch actions. Does this mean I don't have to use any service other than ngrx/store?

I still use services to encapsulate logic. Generally, the components talk to the services and the services talk to the store.

I have found the scope of what a service does goes beyond just storing, so removing them would put too many responsibilities / business logic into the store components.

My store is focused on simple api-like actions, which are short and easy to test, e.g

  static INITIALIZE_CONFIG_REQUEST = 'INITIALIZE_CONFIG_REQUEST';
  static INITIALIZE_CONFIG_SUCCESS = 'INITIALIZE_CONFIG_SUCCESS';
  static INITIALIZE_CONFIG_FAILED  = 'INITIALIZE_CONFIG_FAILED';
  static INITIALIZE_CONFIG_TEMPLATE_ERROR  = 'INITIALIZE_CONFIG_TEMPLATE_ERROR';

  createInitializeConfigRequest() { // separate from invoking call for easier testing
    return {
      type: ConfigActions.INITIALIZE_CONFIG_REQUEST,
      httpRequest: {
        url: 'api/path/to/config',
        successAction: this.createInitializeConfigSuccess,
        failedAction: this.createInitializeConfigFailed,
        validateResponse: (data) => this.checkTemplate(data)
      }
    };
  }
  initializeConfigRequest() {  // called by config.service
    this.store.dispatch( this.createInitializeConfigRequest() );
  }

  createInitializeConfigSuccess(data) {
    const payload = data;
    return {
      type: ConfigActions.INITIALIZE_CONFIG_SUCCESS,
      payload
    };
  }

  createInitializeConfigFailed(error) {
    return {
      type: ConfigActions.INITIALIZE_CONFIG_FAILED,
      payload: {
        error
      }
    };
  }

With this pattern, I can more easily add middleware such as that handling httpRequest and Response validation above.

Most reductions are done via a single generic reducer which makes the assumption that payload properties correspond exactly to store properties. It's my favorite convention, because now I have one set of comprehensive tests for the generic reducer instead of n repetitive tests for n reducers.

  genericActionHandler(state, action) {
    if (!action.payload) {
      return state;
    }
    const newState = {...state};
    Object.assign(newState, action.payload);
    return newState;
  }

Hope that gives you a feel for my architecture.